Wikipedia:Peer review/2007 Atlantic hurricane season/archive1
- A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for June 2008.
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I rewrote this a week or so ago, and with hopes of GA and FA before June 1, 2009, I'd like to know what it needs. Any and all comments are appreciated. Thanks, Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 18:56, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
- Comments.
- The opening sentence is awkward. Given how many records there were, it seems lame only to say it was active compared to 2006 AHS.
- The lede should be better organized. The second paragraph is very long, and is very listy. Either there should be a section in the article dedicated to records, or the paragraph should be re-written for better flow, with the records mentioned elsewhere. On that note, make sure that each of the records are properly sourced. Also, surely, shouldn't the season totals be mentioned in the lede? Nowhere in prose does it say how many TS/H/MH there were.
- Is there any reason the paragraph on Dean mentions it was retired? Retirement is not usually mentioned in these types of articles.
- Watch for unit consistency. BTW, what is with this? about 60 mi (350,000 km/h) or 15 mph (0.0067 km)
- Sourcing is weak overall. You cannot cite everything to the TCR, as there are some pieces of info that don't originate from there. For example, Barry's fatalities, Dean's retirement (which, though it shouldn't be in that paragraph, is not from the TCR), and Felix's damage total, at a quick glance. Along these lines, try and find a good damage total for Hurricane Dean, as we already have that for Felix and Noel. We have most of the damage totals in already, so the sentence although specific damage amounts are unknown is clearly false.
- Check the World Meteorological Organization for additional info for the season
- ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:57, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for the comments. I think I fixed all of your comments (I know you still don't like the lead, but that's done, as well.) I'd like some prose comments, if you get a chance, as well. Thanks, Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 02:03, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Tropical Depression 10 was not extratropical. The tropical cyclone report does not state this. What was the source for this information? Thegreatdr (talk) 00:45, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
- Fixed. Thanks for catching that. Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 02:03, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Comments from Ealdgyth (talk · contribs)
- You said you wanted to know what to work on before taking to FAC, so I looked at the sourcing and referencing with that in mind. I reviewed the article's sources as I would at FAC.
- Watch the use of all capitals in your website titles. Per WP:MOS, all capitals is frowned on.
- Current ref 48 is missing a last access date
- Hope this helps. Please note that I don't watchlist Peer Reviews I've done. If you have a question about something, you'll have to drop a note on my talk page to get my attention. (My watchlist is already WAY too long, adding peer reviews would make things much worse.) 22:58, 15 June 2008 (UTC)